111–119 of 119 posts
Sounds about right, to someone like me who doesn't know anything at all about stocks. They seem to generally always go up and twitter probably isn't going to go away until some better(For an average consumer) platform comes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like he overlooks the possibility that the bot issue would turn up evidence that Twitter's executives knew that it wasn't quite following the described protocols. But more generally, my point was that Musk could allege something that could create an MAE, and then the stock would drop and they'd end up arguing about whether the drop was due to the evidence, or due to the evidence's impact on people's belief t…
tptacek's point is that a MAE has nothing to do with the stock price, only revenue or profitability.
I saw the "Buy my dog treats" link at the end and assumed it was the same as "Buy me a coffee". And I was like, "heck yeah I'll purchase some snacks for their puppy". When in reality it meant, "shop at my dog treat store." I don't have a dog myself so I didn't purchase anything haha.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, very crazy, but not for the reasons you think. If Twitter was a Democratic Party institution they would have banned Trump in 2015. Instead, they bent over backwards and created a new policy specifically to justify not banning @POTUS when his rulebreaking[0] became apparent in 2017. The only reason why we even think of Twitter as (D) Media is because January 6th forced them to reverse course. Your theory is incon…
> A much easier explanation is that Twitter management was caught off-guard by Musk, and then later realized Musk was bullshitting in a way they could take advantage of. Doesn't that mean Musk was caught off guard (or in a self-own) by Twitter, not the other way around? Or that it seemed like a good deal for all parties until the floor fell out from under both Twitter and Tesla stock, at which point it became an incr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like he overlooks the possibility that the bot issue would turn up evidence that Twitter's executives knew that it wasn't quite following the described protocols. But more generally, my point was that Musk could allege something that could create an MAE, and then the stock would drop and they'd end up arguing about whether the drop was due to the evidence, or due to the evidence's impact on people's belief t…
tptacek's point is that a MAE has nothing to do with the stock price, only revenue or profitability.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
> ninja edited The Wikipedia article says “Last edited 1 year ago by GreenC bot”. Making serious accusations is extremely bad behaviour - at least check your facts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may or may not help. But it would certainly be a major bargaining chip for Elon. No execs want to go to jail for fraud. These execs are worth 50m+. Losing money is insignificant. Going to jail is a very huge deal
It would be quite funny if he got Twitter into SEC trouble, just to become it's owner a bit later; especially given their history. Anyway, this is just my unprofessional opinion, but for him to be able to prove intentional deceit is already going to be quite hard. Conditional on him managing that, he'd need to use a number he - by his own statements - hardly believed to clear the incredibly high bar of MAE in Delawar…
He took over twitter. Fire the execs. Opening up all emails.
You can bet at least one person out of 6000 employees disagree with how twitter counts bot number.
Pick that email, point out that execs discarded a concern raised by employee.
Change the calculation of bot number to be higher. Report to SEC in public earning. Allude that the previous number was just plainly wrong.
Sue the execs for fraud... since SEC accepts the new number and approach which is materially different from the old number.
To be honest, just opening up all emails is already bad enough for execs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of what you said has anything to do with MAE
What is your take on what would constitute an MAE? I haven't followed the transaction as carefully as some, but I have seen some coverage of it, including from fellow lawyers. I've not heard anyone claim that news regarding the number of bots has nothing to do with MAE.