801–810 of 1001 posts
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…
This is not oligarchy. Using that term here makes no sense.
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…
A company is not a bag of potatoes in the market to sell at the whims of the highest bidder. Here is what would be looking after their fiduciary duties: The company had a loss of 200 million dollars this year. Was only profitable 2 years out of its 16 years of existence. The board should state that Twitter in the hands of Elon Musk, could jeopardize its current unique and somewhat also precarious, place in social med…
But see, this point is irrelevant in this scenario. If they sell, every current shareholder gets bought out in full, they no longer have a stake in the company. He could shut it down the next day and it wouldn't affect the former shareholders, the company's future at that point is only Elon (and Twitter employees' and users') concern.
It's fiduciary duty to the shareholders, not the company itself, not the employees.
Can anybody make a good argument as to why Twitter (in its current form) isn’t a major detriment to society? If Twitter poofed out of existence today, it would be a major win for this planet. People talk about a frightening future with a human hostile AI that wants to destroy humanity. That exists, it’s twitter. Elon buying it, even if he runs it into the ground is a good thing. Getting rid of some of the hostile AI…
The cat is entirely out of the bag. There are many competitors to Twitter (Facebook comes to mind, albeit somewhat different) and the concept of an open online discussion forum, with all its toxicity but also its potential for timely and impactful communication, is not going away. Users have clearly proven they want myriad large scale social media platforms, and Twitter provides a niche and UX that appeals to a lot o…
I see how this argument would be true. Thank you, that's actually quite insightful.
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…
> Boards have a fiduciary duty to the shareholders. 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. The fact that their primary concern has to be for their shareholders and not whether the sale will be good at all for the rest of humanity is a huge problem in my eyes.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_Corporation_(certification)
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…
I have some Twitter stock, and will be happy to transmorgrify it into another Musk company!
> Will endeavor to keep as many shareholders in privatized Twitter as allowed by law
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1514681422212128770
So I now wonder what is the % of shares one has to hold to obtain private investor status by law?
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.
https://fair.org/home/washington-post-ran-16-negative-storie...
Journalists and bluechecks seem to be particularly mad about this. I guess they don't like the prospect of having to follow rules that are transparently enforced rather than the current system of favoritism and opacity
A major Twitter shareholder and Saudi prince Alwaleed rejects Elon's offer to takeover Twitter. https://www.reuters.com/technology/saudi-prince-alwaleed-bin...