Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

Post by fooey » Fri, Jul 08, 2022, 10:14 PM UTC

minimaxir wrote: post #33

pclmulqdq wrote: post #4

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?

His team apparently had a tough time verifying the data due to API rate limits. > While Twitter has provided some information, that information has come with strings attached, use limitations or other artificial formatting features, which has rendered some of the information minimally useful to Mr. Musk and his advisors. For example, when Twitter finally provided access to the eight developer “APIs” first explicitly…

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jul 08, 2022, 10:15 PM UTC

avalys wrote: post #197

atlasunshrugged wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Post by cratermoon » Fri, Jul 08, 2022, 10:15 PM UTC

hourago wrote: post #90

timsneath wrote: post #17

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…

> He's clearly eccentric in his approach to decision making Being called Eccentric is the luxury of the rich. If he was poor one will say "irresponsible" or even "crazy".

Post by FerociousTimes » Fri, Jul 08, 2022, 10:15 PM UTC

mzs wrote: post #190

pryce wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone's stock is as incredibly overinflated as Tesla has been for so long, choosing the most effective way to liquidate stock without triggering a run becomes a social engineering problem with the incentive of a multi-billion dollar payoff. Honestly I think other people trying to read this situation in some way that ignores a multi billion dollar incentive just sitting there is utterly naive.

You say social engineering, I say criminal fraud.

Post by philosopher1234 » Fri, Jul 08, 2022, 10:15 PM UTC

paxys wrote: post #149

cormacrelf wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s because they want him to pay the agreed price. It is an extremely good deal for the shareholders now, so they are behaving perfectly rationally. And they can possibly force him to.

Yes but it was clear (to all outside observers, not the board apparently) that Musk never intended to pay the agreed price. He was just collecting enough material from them to justify his breach, and fake users was a smokescreen. Their response to any questions/statements about fake users should have been the equivalent of "you signed the agreement, now stick to it" not "let's work together and resolve your issues".