51–60 of 542 posts
A very odd set of events and no explanation regarding Elon's change of mind. A pessimist would think that Elon has decided to go for a "hostile" takeover since he is no longer bound by the percentage holding cap. An optimistic would think that Elon had enough self-awareness to realize it would be an overall distraction for Twitter with little benefit. It amuses me more than it should that the CEO of Twitter has poste…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Musk usually doesn't do the profit part, which is why he can settle with the SEC for pennies (relatively speaking).
Didn't he profit (in terms of net worth, I guess he didn't realize any gains yet) by not disclosing when he hit the 5% mark?
A very odd set of events and no explanation regarding Elon's change of mind. A pessimist would think that Elon has decided to go for a "hostile" takeover since he is no longer bound by the percentage holding cap. An optimistic would think that Elon had enough self-awareness to realize it would be an overall distraction for Twitter with little benefit. It amuses me more than it should that the CEO of Twitter has poste…
Assuming Musk did take over Twitter, he wouldn't need to be much of a distraction. He could dictate a few rules (don't moderate Twitter, don't ban anyone, etc.) and then leave the company to function as it did before.
I think what he doesn't realize is that reducing moderation on Twitter would lead to a death spiral. Humans would find it less useful, and bots would find it more useful. No one wants to be on a platform that is 99% bots posting inflammatory political content.
Wait "contingent on a background check"? This is the founder of SpaceX a contractor with NASA and DoD and you're gonna run measly background check on him? He most likely has an active TS clearance and works with ITAR.
Was this all calculated stock manipulation? It feels like Musk’s modus operandi: 1: Invest in something, 2: Tweet about it. 3: Grossly violate FTC regulation, 4: profit
WSJ source about the 14.9%: https://www.wsj.com/articles/twitter-to-name-elon-musk-to-it...
> Mr. Musk’s board term is set for two years. So long as he remains a director, he can’t own more than 14.9% of the company’s stock, according to a securities filing. While neither Twitter nor Mr. Musk would give a reason for the cap, that means that Mr. Musk, for now, is precluded from taking over the company outright.
Was this all calculated stock manipulation? It feels like Musk’s modus operandi: 1: Invest in something, 2: Tweet about it. 3: Grossly violate FTC regulation, 4: profit
Does he do that? What did he Invest in something/Tweet/Violate FTC/Profit from? If you're referring to Tesla, you missed the part where he: Lead the delivery of a ridiculous amount of value to the company unrelated to any tweets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
maybe his lawyers informed him he made a mistake. he filed the disclosure on Schedule 13G which prevents him from joining the board, rather than 13D if he wants to do so. but then again, i wouldn't put it past elon to do all the things that the SEC explicitly tells people not to do.
I’m not especially intimate with American bureaucracy. Does filing under the wrong schedule really prevent him from joining the board? Can’t he just file a correction?