111–120 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gosh, I hope he was serious at the point he signed a contract with a $1B penalty, or else he’s the world’s worst businessman.
If you want to move $40B, this is just a two percent transaction fee to avoid losing $200B by spooking the public investors. That’s smart.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gosh, I hope he was serious at the point he signed a contract with a $1B penalty, or else he’s the world’s worst businessman.
If you want to move $40B, this is just a two percent transaction fee to avoid losing $200B by spooking the public investors. That’s smart.
I'm ready for the fireworks. Odds are he will be forced to go through with it, but he will negotiate a lower price. Edit: This is over the mDAU thing still? It's been explained to him very slowly that all the bots that post tweets all day are often not seeing ads, right? That the "monetizable" is a key part of that phrase?
One thing for sure though is that a lot of lawyers are about to make a lot of money.
It seems apparent to this observer that he developed cold feet pretty fast after an impetuous decision, and has been looking for any reason to back out of it since then. The spam accounts angle seems like a convenient scapegoat, rather than a real surprise to him. He's clearly eccentric in his approach to decision making: I don't think any Harvard Business School course will teach "the Musk Principles". But it's uncl…
There's another belief floated by Josh Wolfe (an investor with Lux Capital) who claimed it was a ruse to liquidate Tesla stock en masse without Tesla hodlers getting suspicious and tanking the inflated stock price. https://twitter.com/wolfejosh/status/1545387947578597376
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect the initial decision was something like "hey I could actually just buy Twitter, that would be funny". It's less clear to me why he almost immediately started trying to back out. It's probably a waste of a significant chunk of money, but is that all?
>> It's less clear to me why he almost immediately started trying to back out. That's what you do when you sober up and realize what a mess you've made.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but he will negotiate a lower price How? As best I understand things, he has zero wiggle room - he either buys Twitter for the agreed price or he stumps up the $1B termination fee. And if Twitter's board did go mad and decide to negotiate a lower price, their shareholders would almost certainly block it and/or sue the board, no?
A 1B termination fee is relatively small given that Twitter's market cap is down 10B since the beginning of April.
How that goes is anyone's guess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When Musk made the offer 1. TSLA was trading at ~$1,000 share 2. He offered $54/share Now? 1. TSLA is trading at $750/share (so if Elon musk was 100% in TSLA, he lost 25% of his wealth). 2. Twitter's comprable, Facebook, fell roughly 33% on revised revenue projections and slowing growth. TWTR roughly tracks Facebook, except for last quarter where the stock hasn't moved due to Musk's offer. So Musk became poorer, and…
Do you really believe that the "if" in 1) is true? Really? Enough to make that comment?
It seems apparent to this observer that he developed cold feet pretty fast after an impetuous decision, and has been looking for any reason to back out of it since then. The spam accounts angle seems like a convenient scapegoat, rather than a real surprise to him. He's clearly eccentric in his approach to decision making: I don't think any Harvard Business School course will teach "the Musk Principles". But it's uncl…