I do not believe a reasonable human would consider this statement:

> Please ignore our SEC disclosure and half-billion dollar quarterly loss, and instead trust my unregulated statements posted on Twitter.

As actually possibly coming from the mouth of the CEO of a company (that is not Elon).

As I said,

> People can’t detect subtle or not-so-subtle cues.

Or they just skim part of the comment and jump to reply immediately. Same effect.

I never would have thought a CEO would make a statement like this:

>We have no risk of bankruptcy

Reality is that every company has greater than "no risk" of bankruptcy. That's why regulators force them to spell out their risks in filings.

You already write why that is mathematically impossible, so the logical conclusion would be that it is not meant to be interpreted like that no? Language is not maths, no risk doesn't mean the risk is zero. It means the risk is unlikely.

These are complicated topics. The people buying crypto at Coinbase are not sophisticated investors.

It is entirely reasonable to believe that a large proportion of Coinbase users would read, "We have no risk of bankruptcy" and choose to leave their money at Coinbase believing that the CEO must have used some financial mechanism to 100% prevent bankruptcy.

Words have meaning, and when you say, "no risk of bankruptcy" there are a lot of people that will be duped into believing that literally.

It would be a bit weird to stop reading mid-Tweet though. After the comma he says Coinbase added a new risk factor to the list as required by the SEC.