Wow, this is almost as embarrassing as the Las Vegas Tunnel...
Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement
191–200 of 1001 posts
Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement
#192It 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…
What my school teacher used to say about
- cold feet - impetous - eccentric - breathlessly arrogant - astonishingly careless
pupils
Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement
#193Earlier 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.
This seems to happen with some regularity in Musk's timeline.
Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> 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.
Well, if the purpose of buying twitter was to improve the user experience of internet users and advance the doctrine of free speech, then why not just spend that same amount of money building your own twitter (mastodon instance or something) and use your publicity to attract users?
[deleted]
Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> 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.
Well, if the purpose of buying twitter was to improve the user experience of internet users and advance the doctrine of free speech, then why not just spend that same amount of money building your own twitter (mastodon instance or something) and use your publicity to attract users?
because that doesn't work.
Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement
#196This was obvious from the moment he brought up the fake accounts problem. The stock market (especially tech) tanked, other investors started having cold feet, and he realized his purchase was a mistake. It is bizarre though that Twitter leadership/board continued to engage with him on the matter – even handing him internal data to analyze – expecting a good faith resolution. Nothing Musk has done in the last few mont…
>Nothing Musk has done in the last few months has been in good faith. Isn't this itself arguing in bad faith? It's fundamentally speculative to make claims about his intentions.
[deleted]
Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement
#197It 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
The deal includes a "specific performance" clause, which allows Twitter to force Musk to carry out the deal. He can't simply pay $1 billion and walk away, he's in for a very messy legal fight. This pretext about bots is incredibly weak and he's in no way guaranteed to win.
If this really were part of some grand master plan, I think he would have left himself an easier out.
Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement
#198Earlier 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?
Of course it's not 100% true, the only thing you should take away is that by TSLA shares crashing, Elon lost a significant amount of wealth that would have been used to purchase Twitter.
Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement
#199This is good for Twitter, and good for the world. Musk's misguided approach to free speech, which says anything that is not explicitly illegal is allowed, would have made Twitter an open forum for spreading lies and hate. My guess is Musk never intended to buy Twitter. He needed an excuse for dumping billions of dollars' worth of TSLA at its peak (while at the same time faulting Bill Gates for shorting TSLA), and his…
> Musk's misguided approach to free speech, which says anything that is not explicitly illegal is allowed, would have made Twitter an open forum for spreading lies and hate. Twitter is of course currently known as a source of Truth and Harmony. "anything not illegal is allowed" sounds decent to me; if you want stuff illegal, make it illegal. If you want unwritten laws dreamt up by anonymous elites and enforced for ra…
That includes spam though
Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
There aren't claiming fraud, there are claiming breach of contract. Including, among other things, by failing to maintain operations in the regular course of business because of, I kid you not, allowing some senior officials to resign . (It's true some of the many other things that are claimed to be breaches relate to alleged failure to fulfill obligations to provide information that Musk supposedly wanted to determi…
It says in the first paragraph about making misleading representations. That is lawyer talk for lying. Lying in this context is fraud. Secondly, the ceo was firing aka asking for resignations from key people, no? That is not maintaining the business, that seems like sabotage.
> It says in the first paragraph about making misleading representations.
It says that after, and modified by, the phrase “appears to have”.
Musk’s lawyers are saying that Twitter actually breached the agreement. They are saying it looks like Twitter may have done other bad things, too, but that's not the same as claiming that Twitter actually did the other things.
> Secondly, the ceo was firing aka asking for resignations from key people, no?
The separately call out people being forced out and people resigning. Absent something not in the letter, the former is a much more reasonable, on its face, complaint.