611–620 of 1001 posts
Let's ignore personality and societal issues for a moment and look at the value proposition. The 'best and final offer' of $54.20 per share is just too low to be acceptable for major investors. Just over year ago, Twitter shares traded at about $70 per share. Musk's offer is about 25% lower than last years peak. There's no reason to assume Twitter shares can't reach the same levels ever again, nothing much has change…
The motivations of Elon are unclear. What is clear is that he hates feeling like his behavior is being controlled or monitored. He loves attention. He's petty. For someone who wants to advance the world and get to Mars, he obsesses over small slights and squabbles far too much. Twitter is far from being some technological marvel. They have a decent application with lots of reach. Doesn't really match the rest of Elon's assets. Doesn't seem to align with his goals.
But let's imagine Elon's Twitter. Let's say he isn't bound by laws and contracts preventing it and he says "anything goes" on the platform. What happens to advertisers? I assume they leave. What happens to staff? I assume they get fired when the revenue dries up. We know what "free speech twitter" looks like; an uber-conservative site devoid of real life and full of misinformation.
Does allowing medical (and other) misinformation and promotion of violence to spread on Twitter serve Elon's ends? Perhaps, if he wishes to make an attempt to become an autocrat (which wouldn't be surprising; it's every geek and billionaire's dream) or support one. It doesn't seem like he'd fight the spread of that misinformation with corrective speech, as he has what's (at best) a loose relationship with the truth.
Since Elon bought his 9% stake, the value of Twitter increased. He mentions selling his shares if the takeover is not accepted. That would make him a lot of money! His offer is also on the high side, this might make people bullish about twitter. On the other hand, I do think he is genuinely interested in buying twitter. But can't help to feel this might also be lucrative for him if the deal doesn't go through. It see…
I personally think this is excellent, in the great scheme of things, maybe this will open a real discussion about the real oligarchic nature of the US political and societal life at the top. I mean, with tech titan (and second wealthiest man on the planet) Bezos owning the WaPo, the moment the tech titan (and the wealthiest man on the planet) Musk will put his hands on Twitter hopefully will also be the moment of som…
Speaking about enlightenment, isn't it strange that Elon Musk is into politics now? I mean he wants to go to Mars, his project was "Flyin' mother nature's silver seed to a new home in the sun", and now he goes right in the opposite direction. Did he have any major setbacks with his Starship?
Quoted post unavailable.
Prediction: I delete my twitter account and move on to a new platform because none of this matters and that's the cycle of online platforms.
Personally, I suppose that the internet has become significantly more stable over the years.
So Twitter was at $70 per share a year ago. So what? Jack Dorsey was CEO a year ago, too. The share price was $33 less than a month ago. But, despite an absolutely incredible roller-coaster news cycle, things have been definitely trending down at Twitter ($33/share last month), which was reflected in its share price. The current executive team (and Dorsey) had wasted time focusing on things that didn't matter instead…
Unsolicited offers almost always get rejected, that's why it's called a "hostile takeover"
I personally think this is excellent, in the great scheme of things, maybe this will open a real discussion about the real oligarchic nature of the US political and societal life at the top. I mean, with tech titan (and second wealthiest man on the planet) Bezos owning the WaPo, the moment the tech titan (and the wealthiest man on the planet) Musk will put his hands on Twitter hopefully will also be the moment of som…
As much as I don’t like WaPo’s Opinion columns and Twitter’s double standards in content moderation, I don’t think the two companies are puppets of their owners. The staff there have their mostly left-leaning political view point and their own moral standard. I don’t necessarily agree with their view, but it’s their view and their voice nonetheless.
This is just robber barons all over again and to believe otherwise one would have to be pretty ignorant of America's history. Chomsky's best insights are about how this kind of control actually works and it isn't really that journalists are censored by owners (though this does occasionally happen).
Let's ignore personality and societal issues for a moment and look at the value proposition. The 'best and final offer' of $54.20 per share is just too low to be acceptable for major investors. Just over year ago, Twitter shares traded at about $70 per share. Musk's offer is about 25% lower than last years peak. There's no reason to assume Twitter shares can't reach the same levels ever again, nothing much has change…
Does he have perhaps more of a vision for twitter than current mgmt?
Did his involvement increase / decrease the stock price?
If they turn him down could he build something for lets say $20B in spending?
Going to be some interesting times.
And by the way, twitter DID invite him to be on the board with the requirement he not get more stock.
> As an all-cash offer, this generates for the shareholders a substantial return with NO RISK, and so the board has a serious legal obligation to carefully review this offer and make a decision. What a gut check. I'm sure this is an obvious comment by now, but seeing the board's response to turning down something like this is going to be an olympic level display of mental gymnastics. Exciting times.