91–100 of 1000 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you think this isn't what is required as part of the acquisition plan?
That's not how acquisitions work. Elon made the offer, it was accepted. Now the company has to continue to operate without his influence until the deal actually closes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He’s being paid millions to keep his hand on the wheel and not be distracted by a deal that may never close.
That's my point though. The board accepted the buyout offer. "Hands on the wheel" means keeping the lights on and making sure everything stays stable until the deal closes. Firing the company's product and revenue leads is the opposite of that.
Baseball fans know of Wally Pipp, who was a solid first baseman for the Yankees for a decade or so. One day Pipp had a headache and was replaced in the lineup by a young Lou Gehrig, who turned out to be one of the greatest hitters in baseball history.
I have no idea if Jay Sullivan is a Lou Gehrig talent, but he's been doing the job while Beykpour is on paternity leave. If you're the CEO of Twitter and you believe the temp guy is doing a better job, why not make the change?
Literally head of product at Twitter, and still not enough clout to have paternity leave respected.
Absolutely toxic workplace.
So there's two options right - the first is that Parag is for some reason making big strategic decisions about the direction of the company despite the fact that we all know he'll be gone if the deal closes. Or he's making big strategic changes at the behest of the acquirers before the deal closes. Neither of these things seem particularly kosher moves to make. The question is how to figure out which one it is. It wo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He’s being paid millions to keep his hand on the wheel and not be distracted by a deal that may never close.
That's my point though. The board accepted the buyout offer. "Hands on the wheel" means keeping the lights on and making sure everything stays stable until the deal closes. Firing the company's product and revenue leads is the opposite of that.
TSLA's stock price may be $1000 by then, or it might be $500. If its $500, Musk may not have the physical money to finish this buyout offer, even if he wanted to.
This entire deal was made when Tesla was near $900 or thereabouts. But then the stock market started to change severely, the bond market changed severely, and now there's a lot of uncertainty if anyone really has enough money for everything to go through fine.
---------
Twitter's board has to keep both possibilities in mind. If Elon Musk's buyout offer fails (either due to Musk personally, or because of changing prices which rekt Musk's networth), Twitter will still need a plan for a Musk-free Twitter future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He’s being paid millions to keep his hand on the wheel and not be distracted by a deal that may never close.
That's my point though. The board accepted the buyout offer. "Hands on the wheel" means keeping the lights on and making sure everything stays stable until the deal closes. Firing the company's product and revenue leads is the opposite of that.
I think it's somewhere between possible and likely that Parag ran this change by Musk. Who is already on record as wanting high-level changes. So this could be just as easily read as the CEO honoring the board's acceptance and getting started early on the changes. Or it could be both: Something that both the current and future CEO saw as in the bests interest of Twitter.
Literally head of product at Twitter, and still not enough clout to have paternity leave respected.
What's wrong with firing someone on paternity leave? It's not like he was fired because he was on paternity leave.