Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

631–640 of 1001 posts

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#631

Post by adolph »

memish wrote: post #577
gunapologist99 wrote: post #521

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…

Would Elon reinstate Jack to set up a Steve Jobs style comeback story?

Evan Williams would be the comeback story. Medium would play the role of NeXT whose core technology shapes the way forward.

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#632

Post by aasasd »

danShumway wrote: post #240

I'm not sure Musk knows what he's doing, this feels like a personal vendetta. I'm also not sure he has any likelihood of succeeding in the first place, I wouldn't necessarily assume anyone is going to take him up at that price. And (quite frankly) I don't think that Musk is a very good free speech activist. I think he's regularly hypocritical about free speech and regularly engages in his own forms of censorship; I d…

maybe more people will start using Mastodon

For sure. Dozens of users will migrate to Mastodon.

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#633

Post by sanedigital »

williamsmj wrote: post #603
RustyConsul wrote: post #510

> "if my offer is rejected i will reconsider my ownership in twitter." Thats an immense amount of selling pressure on the stock... This is a threat. He's negotiating with a gun to their head.

This is standard operating procedure for takeovers, but I think you're massively overestimating the amount of pressure someone selling 9% of the company places on the stock price. Someone buying 9% (with an expecation that they would buy more) moved the stock $10. The same person selling 9% stock (with no possibility that can sell more) is unlikely to move the stock more than that.

Twitter is selling at $45, a $10 move is 22%. That's insane pressure.

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#634

Post by eatsyourtacos »

ryanSrich wrote: post #562
RustyConsul wrote: post #510

> "if my offer is rejected i will reconsider my ownership in twitter." Thats an immense amount of selling pressure on the stock... This is a threat. He's negotiating with a gun to their head.

Seems like an amazing move by Elon. Buy a sizable portion of the business to hold hostage, and then make the company an offer that they essentially can’t refuse because of fiduciary responsibility. If they reject Elon’s offer the stock price will sink like a rock. They pretty much have to take it.

>Seems like an amazing move by Elon

You and I have very different definitions of the word "amazing"

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#635

Post by leereeves »

anonu wrote: post #596
RustyConsul wrote: post #510

> "if my offer is rejected i will reconsider my ownership in twitter." Thats an immense amount of selling pressure on the stock... This is a threat. He's negotiating with a gun to their head.

On the other hand - the stock was flat over the time that he bought... So not in total agreement with you on the stock impact of his selling. It seems like the only impact is the headline risk - and not so much actual selling pressure.

If the stock was flat while Elon was buying almost 10% of the company, it probably would have declined quite a bit if he hadn't been buying, because the people who sold the shares Elon bought would have been looking for other buyers.

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#636

Post by redisman »

yabatopia wrote: post #383

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…

There’s no logical reason to think that the once in a century pandemic response bubble price is in some way the “true” price.

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#637

Post by Someone »

s17n wrote: post #571
gunapologist99 wrote: post #521

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"

To my understanding, this at the moment is neither hostile nor a takeover, but a (rather direct/rude/aggressive; pick whatever adjective you want) question to the board to advise shareholders to accept Musk’s offer.

It could become any of the four options failed takeover, failed hostile takeover, takeover, or hostile takeover.

If the board says “good idea” and advises shareholders to accept the offer, it could or could not become a takeover, depending on whether enough shareholders (by share count) accept it (I don’t know how many is enough, but it’s almost certainly more than 50%, as an OK would force _all_ shareholders to sell. You can’t take a company private and keep shareholders around)

Technically, that wouldn’t be a hostile takeover, though, as it would be with agreement by the board.

If the board advises shareholders to reject the offer Musk could persevere. In the end, if enough shareholders sell their shares to him, the board’s opinion doesn’t matter. if enough shareholders do that, it would become a hostile takeover.

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#638

Post by LatteLazy »

yabatopia wrote: post #383

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…

By that logic, no takeover is every high enough for any takeover. Or for any sale of anything? Long only!

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#639

Post by xixixao »

ROARosen wrote: post #621

The reason this bothers me in principle, is that whatever the side of politics you are, the "public" will have effectively zero control on affecting any board decisions at Twitter, moderation-wise or otherwise. Its true that the public had little say in that regard till now but at least this buyout threat shows that it is "possible" to stand up to whatever decisions their board makes. As an aside, I doubt people and…

I don’t see any connection between ownership and moderation. Perhaps Elon does. But he can be called on by the Senate just as any board appointed CEO. Curious if someone can explain the connection.

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#640

Post by alecco »

gunapologist99 wrote: post #521

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…

And to note, Musk is going against the trend. Ark, the tech permabull, reduced its Twitter position. Cathie Wood just said she started selling after @jack stepped down as CEO. Interesting times.
Post reply on HN