Business

Column: Will billionaire Bill Ackman ever learn to shut up?

Published

2 years ago

January 16, 2024

Column: Will billionaire Bill Ackman ever learn to shut up?

There was a time, I must admit, when the hedge fund billionaire Bill Ackman was one of my Wall Street heroes.

It started in December 2012. Ackman had decided to take a short position in the shares of the multilevel marketing firm Herbalife.

Ackman justified his bet with a heroic 334-deck Power Point presentation laying out all the features of the Los Angeles company that he said made it indistinguishable from a scam: It marketed its nutritional supplements as unique products when they were actually commodity supplements sold at premium prices, he said. It was a pyramid scheme in disguise, and more.

Students are forced to withdraw for much less…Rewarding her with a highly paid faculty position sets a very bad precedent for academic integrity at Harvard.

— Bill Ackman attacks Claudine Gay for plagiarism, before his own wife was also accused

Some of Ackman’s points dovetailed with reporting by me and my colleagues at The Times — that its widely touted “affiliation” with UCLA was a penny-pinching attempt to gain reflected scientific credibility from the university’s reputation (to UCLA’s discredit) and that it exploited Latinos in its marketing, for example.

In short, I saw Ackman’s campaign as an effort to take down a company that needed taking down. That was the good side of Bill Ackman — willing to take a short position in a highflying stock and back it up with solid research. Only someone with a lot of money and even more personal vanity seemed capable of this audacious approach.

As it happened, however, Ackman’s campaign also revealed the drawbacks of Ackmanism. He was so confident that government regulators would seize on his claims and bring the stock — then trading in the mid $40s — to zero, that he publicly disclosed that he had placed a $1-billion short bet against the company. (Short investments make money if the shares fall.)

His audacity brought Ackman haters out of the woodwork. Among those who harbored old gripes about Ackman was the storied investor Carl Icahn, who evidently (as I wrote) “relished the opportunity to put the squeeze on a short-seller who had been unwise enough to proclaim his vulnerable position to the world.” Icahn took the other side of the bet, propping up Herbalife’s price.

Ultimately, the company settled a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit by paying $200 million to 350,000 consumers who had been gulled by “Herbalife’s deceptive earnings claims” into signing on as Herbalife marketers. The company agreed to restructure its business.

That didn’t save Ackman, because the company survived. He disclosed in early 2018 that he finally had exited his short investment in Herbalife, taking a loss that some investment analysts estimated at the full $1 billion.

Obviously, Ackman’s mistake then was braggadocio. Had he kept his short bet quiet, he might have been able to ride Herbalife’s price decline down to a healthy profit. But he couldn’t resist boasting about how smart and audacious he was.

The same character flaw has been on display in Ackman’s latest crusade, which began as an ultimately successful effort to oust Claudine Gay as the president of Harvard. This effort necessarily had to be waged in public, since it was clear that only public pressure would force the hand of Gay and Harvard’s leadership.

Ackman began his crusade with complaints about Gay’s response to purported antisemitism on the Harvard campus and her flatfooted response to a tendentious question from right-wing Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) at a congressional hearing. After her resignation as president, Ackman latched onto accusations of plagiarism in some of Gay’s academic writing to assert that she should also be fired from the university’s faculty.

“Students are forced to withdraw for much less,” Ackman tweeted. “Rewarding her with a highly paid faculty position sets a very bad precedent for academic integrity at Harvard.”

That’s the public position that has come back to bite Ackman where it hurts the most. By pushing on the plagiarism accusations against Gay, Ackman opened the door to a broader inquiry into plagiarism in academia — specifically, in the work of his wife, Neri Oxman, a former professor at MIT.

The publication by Business Insider of allegedly plagiarized passages in Oxman’s work has set Ackman off on a delirious public snit against Business Insider and contortions about what is and isn’t plagiarism and what volume of it warrants professional extermination, all played out in extended tweets. The battle has led to further examination of Oxman’s work, which doesn’t always impress with its coherence.

A few other billionaires with ambitions of running the world have learned that they have a better chance of getting what they want out of life by remaining in the background. One is Peter Thiel, who privately and quietly bankrolled a privacy lawsuit brought by wrestler Hulk Hogan against the celebrity website Gawker.

Thiel’s role in backing Hogan’s lawsuit with a $10-million donation remained a secret until after a jury returned a $140-million judgment against Gawker. Would Gawker have lost if it could have made Thiel’s role public? Possibly not. By remaining behind the curtain, Thiel got what he wanted, which was effectively to put Gawker out of business.

Then there’s Elon Musk, who was able to bask in his public image as a brilliant engineer with the ability to solve global warming and advance the cause of space travel through his companies Tesla and SpaceX. That lasted until he bought Twitter and became the tweeter-in-chief, revealing himself as an unreconstructed right-wing antisemitic conspiracy monger.

The effects this revelation will have on Tesla’s electric vehicle sales and SpaceX’s role as a government contractor are still unclear, but they may not be good.

There’s more to this than a yarn about a billionaire hedge fund manager with terminal digital logorrhea. Ackman plainly never learned the lesson of the Streisand Effect, which describes how efforts to conceal or suppress information end up bringing that information even greater public attention.

(The term refers to an attempt by Barbra Streisand to have an aerial photo of her Malibu estate removed from a government mapping project; rather than secure her privacy, Streisand’s lawsuit turned the photo into a sensation on the internet, where it remains easily available.)

Ackman’s public conniptions on X, formerly Twitter, don’t make him, Oxman, MIT or the MIT Media Lab, where Oxman used to be a professor, look good. And none of it would have happened if Ackman had kept his mouth shut.

That brings us to what has reemerged into public awareness as a result. Oxman’s reputation as a public intellectual, such as it was, doesn’t seem to have been enhanced by the more recent scrutiny of her work. Not that doubts about her output are entirely new: In 2018, Rachelle Hampton of Slate.com memorably, and accurately, described Oxman’s Twitter feed as “a stream of majestic gobbledygook.”

The Streisand Effect demonstrated its potency as recently as Monday, when Ackman posted a fantastically lengthy tweet responding to a report in Business Insider about Oxman’s dealings with the late sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, who had been a big contributor to the MIT Media Lab. Who knew? Today, plenty of people.

Ackman objected to Business Insider’s assertion that he “pressured” MIT in emails to keep Oxman’s name out of the developing Epstein scandal. (Business Insider attributed the “pressure” claim to the Boston Globe, but the Globe didn’t use that term and merely reported the emails.)

In his own defense, Ackman posted the key email in question and urged his X followers to read it “carefully so you can see for yourself.”

Ackman must have been bluffing, on the assumption that no one would bother actually reading the email. Those who do will discover that it reads unmistakably as a threat to do damage to MIT’s reputation if Oxman’s name is mentioned in connection with the Epstein matter.

Here’s the money quote, from a message from Ackman to Joi Ito, then the Media Lab’s director:

“It is very important that you don’t mention Neri’s name or otherwise get her involved or she will have to issue her own statement to protect her reputation explaining why it was sent and at whose request, who else received similar gifts, how she met Epstein, who else at MIT received funding from Epstein … This will of course blow this up even more which we would certainly not like to see happen.”

Tell me that doesn’t remind you of that stock joke in which gangsters tell their target, “Nice place you got here. Be a shame if anything happened to it.”

This only resurrected the noisome history of Epstein and the Media Lab, which MIT surely hoped would be dead and buried after it issued an independent report on the matter in January 2020. The report says Ito “cultivated Epstein as a donor” even after Epstein’s 2008 conviction in Florida for soliciting minors for prostitution. Ito resigned from MIT in 2019.

Among the beneficiaries, according to the report, was Oxman, who met Epstein on campus in 2015 and received donations from him totaling $125,000 for her research (Ackman says it was $150,000). In 2017, she arranged to have a ceremonial resin “orb,” apparently a gewgaw given to donors and other honorees that she designed, delivered to Epstein. After their one meeting in 2015, Ackman says, Oxman “never accepted an invitation or saw or spoke to [Epstein] again.” The MIT report doesn’t state otherwise.

MIT can’t be happy that Ackman has turned the spotlight again on the Media Lab, which has regularly been criticized as an overblown hive of inflated egos with the skimpiest record of accomplishments to its name. Anyway, Oxman left MIT in 2021.

The greatest damage that Ackman’s tweets have done may be to the debate over academic plagiarism. Despite asserting that Gay’s plagiarism damaged Harvard’s reputation for “academic integrity,” he now argues that allegations of Oxman’s copying of passages and phrases from other sources — including even Wikipedia — without proper attribution amount only to trivial citation errors, not plagiarism at all.

He has threatened to sue Business Insider, which says its stories on the issue are “accurate and the facts well documented.” He also has threatened to do a scrub on the academic work of MIT’s hundreds of faculty members in search of plagiarism.

Is there any clarity to come out of this mudslinging? The answer is no — just more mud. And more noise … until Ackman learns to shut up.

Business

‘We’ve lost our way’: Clifton’s operator gives up on downtown Los Angeles

Published

3 hours ago

April 18, 2026

Press Room

‘We’ve lost our way’: Clifton’s operator gives up on downtown Los Angeles

The proprietor of Los Angeles’ legendary Clifton’s has given up on reopening the shuttered venue.

It’s just too difficult to do business in downtown’s historic core, he says.

Andrew Meieran bought Clifton’s on Broadway in 2010 and poured more than $14 million into repairs, renovations and upgrades, adding additional bar and restaurant spaces in the four-story building. In 2018, he found that demand for cafeteria food was too low to be profitable, and he pivoted to a nightclub and lounge concept called Clifton’s Republic, featuring multiple dining and drinking venues. Meieran has tried elaborate themed environments, such as a tiki bar and forest playgrounds, and renting out the location for big events to spark more interest.

It was never easy, but during and since the pandemic, the neighborhood has grown increasingly unsafe as downtown has emptied of office workers and visitors.

Storefronts are gated up due to vandalism in the historic district in downtown Los Angeles on Tuesday.

(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)

The alley behind Clifton's Cafeteria in the downtown historic district Tuesday.

Vandalism has been rampant, with graffiti appearing on the historic structure almost daily. Vandals would use acid or diamond glass cutters to deface the windows, often cracking the glass. It would cost Meieran more than $30,000 each time to replace the windows. Insurance companies either stopped offering policies that covered vandalism or raised premiums by as much as 600%, he said.

There has been continuous crime in the area, he said, including multiple assaults on people in front of his building. He last shut the venue last year, hoping things would improve and he could come back with a business that could work. Now he has given up. Someone else may take over the space or even the name of the historic spot, but he is done trying.

“We’ve lost our way,” Meieran said. “I want to get up on the tops of the skyscrapers and yell that people need to pay attention to this.”

The disenchantment of a business leader who used to be one of downtown L.A.’s biggest backers shines a spotlight on the stubborn safety concerns, rising costs and thinner foot traffic that have made it increasingly difficult for even iconic businesses to survive.

The once-popular institution dates back to 1935, when it was a Depression-era cafeteria and kitschy oasis that sold as many as 15,000 meals a day when Broadway was the city’s entertainment hub.

It served traditional cafeteria food such as pot roast, mashed potatoes and Jell-O in a woodsy grotto among fake redwood trees and a stone-wrapped waterfall reminiscent of Brookdale Lodge in Northern California.

It’s not the only once-prominent destination that has failed to find a way to flourish in today’s market. Cole’s, one of L.A.’s most famous restaurants and often credited with inventing the French dip sandwich, closed last month after a 118-year run.

“The bigger problem for us and the rest of the industry is the high cost of doing business,” said Cedd Moses, who used to operate Cole’s and has backed many other bars and restaurants in historic buildings downtown for decades. “That’s what is killing independent restaurants in this city.”

Clifton's Republic owner Andrew Meieran stands next to a boat on the top floor of the historic restaurant in 2024.

Clifton’s opened and closed repeatedly during the pandemic and, more recently, after a burst pipe caused extensive damage. Meieran opened it for special events such as last Halloween, but it has otherwise been closed.

Police are woefully understaffed and hampered by public policy, said Blair Besten, president of downtown’s Historic Core Business Improvement District, a nonprofit that arranges graffiti removal, trash pickup and safety patrols in the area.

Businesses and residents in the area would like to see a bigger police presence, but there have been protests against that by people who are not from downtown, she said.

“People are starting to see the fruits of the defunding movement,” she said. “It has not led us to a better place as a city.”

The Los Angeles Police Department is making progress downtown, Captain Kelly Muniz said, with violent crime down more than 10% from last year.

“While we’re working very hard to solve crime, to prevent crime, there are still elements such as trash, open-air drug use, homelessness and graffiti,” she said. “We’re swinging in the right direction.”

Retailers have been opting out of downtown L.A., said real estate broker Derrick Moore of CBRE, who helps arrange commercial property leases. Brands have headed to more vibrant nearby neighborhoods such as Echo Park and Silver Lake.

“A lot of operators are just electing to skip over downtown,” he said. “They’re leasing spaces elsewhere, where they feel they have a greater chance at higher sales.”

A man walks past a pile of trash left on the street in the historic district.

While some businesses are struggling, many downtown residents say their perceptions of safety are improving and that the area is regaining some vibrancy.

“A lot of people live here. I think people forget that,” Besten said. “We’re all surviving. It’s just hard for all the businesses to survive.”

A green shoot for the Historic Core is Art Night on the first Thursday of every month, when 50 or 60 locations, including permanent art galleries and pop-up galleries in unused storefronts, display art to map-toting visitors who come for the occasion.

They often end up in Spring Street bars, which more typically thrive on weekend nights but are still a draw to downtown.

“I think nightlife will thrive downtown, since bars attract people that don’t mind a little grittier atmosphere,” said Moses. “Our sales are hitting new records at our bars downtown, fortunately, but our costs have risen dramatically.”

Clifton’s former backer, Meieran, says he doesn’t think things are going to bounce back enough to warrant more massive investment. He has sold the building, and the owner is looking for a new tenant to occupy Clifton’s space. He still controls the Clifton’s name.

While there is still a chance he could let someone else use the name Clifton’s, Meieran is done for now — too many bad memories.

“There was a guy who was terrorizing the front of Clifton’s because he decided he wanted to live in the vestibule in front, and he didn’t want us to operate there,” Meieran said. “He would threaten to kill anybody who came through.”

He doesn’t believe official statistics that show crime and homelessness are way down in the area, and he doesn’t want to restart a business when criminals can so easily erase his hard work.

“What business that’s already on thin margins can survive that?” he said.

Business

If you shop at Trader Joe’s, it may owe you $100

Published

15 hours ago

April 17, 2026

Press Room

If you shop at Trader Joe’s, it may owe you 0

Trader Joe’s customers might soon get a payout from the popular grocery chain.

The Monrovia-based company agreed to a $7.4-million settlement in a class action lawsuit that claimed customers were left vulnerable to identity theft.

Customers who purchased items with a credit or debit card from March to July in 2019 might be eligible for a payment as part of the settlement.

The plaintiff alleged that some receipts printed in 2019 included 10-digit credit or debit card numbers —double what’s allowed under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act.

Trader Joe’s “vigorously denies any and all liability or wrongdoing whatsoever,” the grocery chain said in the settlement website. The grocery chain decided to settle to avoid a long and costly litigation process.

The payout will go toward paying impacted customers as well as attorney fees and other expenses.

About $2.6 million will go toward attorney fees, and the plaintiff will receive a $10,000 incentive payment, according to the settlement. The remaining funds will be distributed evenly among customers who submit valid claims.

It’s unclear how much money each customer would get, but the payout could be about $102, according to the settlement notice.

To receive the payout, customers must have received a receipt displaying the first six and last four digits of the card number.

Some customers identified as part of the settlement class have been notified and received a class ID number to file a claim.

Customers have from now until June 6 to file a claim online or by phone.

A customer not identified in the settlement can still submit a claim by entering the first six and last four digits of the card used, along with the date it was used at Trader Joe’s.

Brian Keim, the plaintiff who brought the case, used his debit card at stores in Florida in 2019. He said some stores printed transaction receipts that included the first six and last four digits of customers’ card numbers.

The receipts did not include other personal information, such as the middle digits of the users’ cards, the cards’ expiration dates, or the users’ addresses. No customer has reported identity theft as a result of the receipts since the lawsuit was filed, the grocer said.

However, identity theft doesn’t require submitting a claim for payment.

The settlement was agreed upon by both the grocer and the plaintiff, but still has to be approved by a court. A hearing is set in August.

Business

Used EV sales charge up on high gas prices, even as new EV demand declines

Published

1 day ago

April 17, 2026

Press Room

Used EV sales charge up on high gas prices, even as new EV demand declines

As gas prices soared in California last month, Irvine resident Marc Tan realized his Mercedes SUV was getting too expensive to refuel.

He decided to save money at the pump and purchased a used Tesla last month.

“I had to trade in my SUV, “ said Tan, who works as a nurse. “It was just too expensive.”

Tan has bought two electric vehicles this year to avoid relying on gas while driving his kids to school and activities.

As the war in Iran squeezes the global oil supply, fuel prices have increased sharply across the U.S. Average prices in California climbed to nearly $6 per gallon, according to AAA, while national prices were slightly above $4. Gas prices in California have risen 30% since the start of the year, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The trend has driven renewed interest in electric vehicles, and those looking to save money on gas are also trying to save money on their cars by buying pre-owned vehicles.

New EV sales are still declining following blows to the industry from the Trump administration, but used EVs are bucking that trend because they look more affordable now relative to new cars and used gas-powered cars.

Used EV sales increased more than 20% year over year in the first quarter of 2026, according to data from Cox Automotive.

Used electric vehicles now cost around the same as used traditional cars and often offer better value, experts said.

“The high gas prices are getting people to look at what their options are, and the wheels are starting to spin,” said Jessica Caldwell, an auto analyst at Edmunds. “You can get a pretty nice used EV for under $25,000, which is not easy to do on the market at large,” including electric and gas cars.

Electric vehicles depreciate in value faster than traditional cars, meaning buyers can get a good deal on a used EV that hasn’t been on the road for long.

Used EVs are typically less than four years old and equipped with modern technology such as driver assistance, heated seats and Apple CarPlay. A wave of them is hitting the market as they come off lease from 2023, a year of heightened EV enthusiasm and new models.

While former President Biden was in office in 2023, the federal government heavily incentivized the transition to electric vehicles.

A Tesla dealership with cars lined up in the lot in Long Beach.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

“It’s not surprising that the used EV market is starting to accelerate, because it was about three or four years ago that the new one started accelerating,” said Mark Schirmer, director of industry insights at Cox Automotive. “We’re starting to get a better variety, better choice and better price points.”

Used EVs also tend to have lower mileage than their gas counterparts and therefore better value, Schirmer said, because EV drivers don’t use them for long road trips to avoid having to stop and charge.

Used electric vehicle sales increased 25% in the first quarter this year, according to Cox. New electric vehicle sales were down 26% in February from a year earlier.

The EV industry has faced setbacks recently as the Trump administration pares back EV incentives and dealership requirements, including eliminating a California ban on new gas-powered car sales by 2035.

In response, major automakers such as Ford, Hyundai and Stellantis have cut their EV offerings.

EV sales crashed following the September expiration of a $7,500 tax credit for new EVs and a $4,000 credit for used ones.

“There’s no premium you have to pay for an EV in the used market,” said iSeeCars.com analyst Karl Brauer. “Value is huge for used buyers, and when gas prices are going up, that becomes a focus.”

On social media, car shoppers and recent EV buyers are sharing their reasons for making the switch to electric.

“Not having to deal with the ups and downs of gas prices is one of the benefits of owning an EV,” one Reddit user wrote last month.

Another Reddit user said it cost them $1.59 total to charge their Ford Mustang Mach-E for six hours, reaching a battery level of 90%.

In California, the appeal of a new or used EV is twofold — gas prices are especially high, and charging infrastructure is more developed than in many other states. Although electricity rates are increasing in the state, many residents are turning to solar power to source their own energy for their cars and homes.

Data show that more people are shopping for EVs even if they haven’t made purchases yet.

Cars.com saw a 25% increase in searches for used EVs from the end of February to the end of March, and a 23% increase in searches for new EVs.

“I don’t see how else you can get a vehicle that’s as new, as reliable, as safe and as affordable as used electric vehicle,” auto analyst Brian Moody said. “Add to that the current gas prices, and it’s a no-brainer.”

Tesla’s were the most commonly searched for vehicle among used EVs on the site, according to Cars.com data.

Tesla sales have stumbled over the past year, hurt by industry challenges and reputation damage after Elon Musk involved himself in politics. Many alienated Tesla owners sold their vehicles in protest, leading to an influx of them on the used market, and therefore lower prices.

Tesla was dethroned early this year by Chinese automaker BYD as the largest EV seller in the world, but for many Californians, Musk’s signature vehicles are still an obvious choice. They come with an extensive super charging network and widespread service centers. They also offer “Full Self-Drive” mode, which appeals to many shoppers despite coming under regulatory scrutiny.

Tan, who bought two Teslas this year as gas prices have shot up, said he’s satisfied with his purchases.

“To me, Teslas are the most safe and reliable,” Tan said. “Gas has been absolutely too expensive.”