491–500 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why will the price tank? None of this changes the value of Twitter if he walks away.
He will sell his 9% He will start something to compete against Twitter. Twitter will be stuck with their current management and cultural problems.
Wow, my prediction is Musk will walk away, Twitter stock price will tank, and Twitter will be flooded with thousands of shareholder lawsuits (for breaching their fiduciary duty).
Why will the price tank? None of this changes the value of Twitter if he walks away.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I was a member of Twitter's board, Musk's history of erratic public behavior, SEC settlement, and openly hostile attitude towards the company's employees would be more than sufficient to justify my belief that his controlling ownership would not be in the interest of the current average shareholder. That opinion would also be consistent with how "fiduciary duty" is interpreted by US regulators: companies are not r…
> If I was a member of Twitter's board, Musk's history of erratic public behavior, SEC settlement, and openly hostile attitude towards the company's employees would be more than sufficient to justify my belief that his controlling ownership would not be in the interest of the current average shareholder. That... makes absolutely no sense. The interest of the current average shareholder ends when they sell their stock…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I was a member of Twitter's board, Musk's history of erratic public behavior, SEC settlement, and openly hostile attitude towards the company's employees would be more than sufficient to justify my belief that his controlling ownership would not be in the interest of the current average shareholder. That opinion would also be consistent with how "fiduciary duty" is interpreted by US regulators: companies are not r…
> If I was a member of Twitter's board, Musk's history of erratic public behavior, SEC settlement, and openly hostile attitude towards the company's employees would be more than sufficient to justify my belief that his controlling ownership would not be in the interest of the current average shareholder. That... makes absolutely no sense. The interest of the current average shareholder ends when they sell their stock…
That definitionally depends on whether you, as that hypothetical board member, believe that Twitter has the potential to reach a share price higher than $54.20 if it stays public.
Also, remember there is nothing that binds the board of a company to solely consider potential shareholder value in the actions they take. There's a widespread belief that "fiduciary duty" overrides all other concerns, but from a regulatory/legal standpoint, that's simply not so. The board obviously needs to take it into account, but if they believe a merger or takeover is not in the best interest of the company, they don't have to take it.
If elon owns twitter privately he can just go through his comments and ban the impersonators on the spot. He has complained for years about twitter not doing enough to stop scam impersonators. In fact he can ban anyone then. He would literally have that power. Conversely, he could also unban anyone. There would be no chain of command. Imagine using fakebook but then also having the power to ban anyone too. I think he…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
North Korea is under heavy sanctions and is thus a poor choice. But if France put a bid on twitter, they would be forced to entertain the offer.
If the China Investment Corporation offered $60 billion to take Twitter private would Twitter be forced to entertain the offer?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
$TWTR has been trending down over the last year. When he bought, the price went up 27%, signaling that people thought his involvement would be positive for the company. If he says "twitter is hopeless" and pulls out, the sentiment will be that nothing can save twitter.
this is incorrect. the price going up is a reflection of the market's believe about the % likelihood of a deal. for example at market close of $45.08, the market is betting there is a $45.08/$54.20 = 83% chance that this transaction goes through. there are certainly individual stockholders who are buying because they like his involvement, but that is tiny compared to people buying and selling a very near-term bet
This assumes the price without the transactions goes to $0.00!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>So almost $6/share was left on the table. This is only true if the there is no uncertainty. If you think the value without the takeover is $30, and it is trading at 48, and buyout is $54, that means the market thinks it 75% likely. downside -$18, upside +$6 = 75% likely
Interesting. As a point of comparison, when Microsoft bid a 62% premium for Yahoo back in '08, Yahoo stock spiked about 48%. Doing the math, the market placed the likelihood at 48÷62=77%. In other words, the market is wildly optimistic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A company can't pay a dividend to some shareholders but not others. This action would effectively be giving in-the-money call options to some shareholders but not others. Probably legal, but pretty dodgy.
> company can't pay a dividend to some shareholders but not others But it can sell shares to some and not others [1]. (This was a landmark decision [2].) [1] https://law.justia.com/cases/delaware/supreme-court/1985/493... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unocal_Corp._v._Mesa_Petroleum... .
Having the board ignore a large shareholder would be one thing. Shares give votes, and terms don't turn over every day, and we don't kick out politicians as soon as the polls turn sour on them. Fine. But if a shareholder has enough shares to change the board composition (or just threatens to) the incumbents can just unilaterally decide that the challenger owns a smaller fraction of the company than they bought on the open market? Maybe it's not technically self-dealing, but it's bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why will the price tank? None of this changes the value of Twitter if he walks away.
$TWTR has been trending down over the last year. When he bought, the price went up 27%, signaling that people thought his involvement would be positive for the company. If he says "twitter is hopeless" and pulls out, the sentiment will be that nothing can save twitter.