Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elon’s Out

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 767 posts

Re: Elon’s Out

#161

Post by daenz »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #140
alphabetting wrote: post #4

I found this part most interesting. Public awareness of the Delaware Court of Chancery is about to skyrocket during this court battle. The fact that Musk is working in such bad faith here — that he seems so unconcerned with law and the contract he signed — cuts both ways. On the one hand, it will certainly annoy a Delaware chancellor; Delaware likes to think of itself as a stable place for corporate deals, with predi…

> What if the court orders Musk to close the deal and he says no? I can't believe people are taking this very silly statement seriously. This is utter nonsense. There are remedies for people who disobey court orders. Having assets makes you more vulnerable to a court's authority because you have something to lose. If a court orders specific performance and he doesn't do it then he's liable and the court will take his…

>the court will take his assets to compensate.

How do you seize billions of dollars of stock without affecting share prices?

Re: Elon’s Out

#162

Post by throwaway09223 »

heartbreak wrote: post #151
throwaway09223 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What if the court orders Musk to close the deal and he says no? I can't believe people are taking this very silly statement seriously. This is utter nonsense. There are remedies for people who disobey court orders. Having assets makes you more vulnerable to a court's authority because you have something to lose. If a court orders specific performance and he doesn't do it then he's liable and the court will take his…

Levine’s take is based on how Musk’s previous encounters with court orders have gone.

No, it isn't. It's completely disconnected from reality.

There isn't even one single court imposed fine which he hasn't paid.

Re: Elon’s Out

#163

Post by sascha_sl »

hotpotamus wrote: post #150
throwaway09223 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What if the court orders Musk to close the deal and he says no? I can't believe people are taking this very silly statement seriously. This is utter nonsense. There are remedies for people who disobey court orders. Having assets makes you more vulnerable to a court's authority because you have something to lose. If a court orders specific performance and he doesn't do it then he's liable and the court will take his…

Anytime the idea of a wealth tax is brought up, I see commenters coming out of the woodwork to say that it would be impossible to actually collect it from the wealthy. Though I will note that it seems like we are able to collect yachts and planes from Russian oligarchs now, so perhaps our techniques have advanced in the last few months.

There's an entire profession who's job it is to go full scale threat modeling on assets held directly or indirectly by the extremely rich. Seems likely they either didn't account for war sanctions or thought the impacted assets would not be worth putting behind 10 proxy legal owners for the unlikely case of such sanctions. Yachts and planes seem like they'd be particularly hard to turn into assets owned by a local proxy entity, since they move around so much.

Re: Elon’s Out

#164

Post by almost_usual »

daenz wrote: post #161
throwaway09223 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What if the court orders Musk to close the deal and he says no? I can't believe people are taking this very silly statement seriously. This is utter nonsense. There are remedies for people who disobey court orders. Having assets makes you more vulnerable to a court's authority because you have something to lose. If a court orders specific performance and he doesn't do it then he's liable and the court will take his…

>the court will take his assets to compensate. How do you seize billions of dollars of stock without affecting share prices?

Don’t invest in a company ran by a lunatic?

Re: Elon’s Out

#165

Post by ALittleLight »

edgyquant wrote: post #100
tenpies wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The fact your argument rests on a convicted billionaire is pretty ironic

I think it's more about the people who murdered Epstein getting away without consequences or even an investigation than the fact that a rich guy, eventually, after repeatedly sexually abusing and trafficking children for years, finally was facing serious legal risks which he might've evaded.

Re: Elon’s Out

#166

Post by roca »

georgeburdell wrote: post #132

Musk holds a key piece of America’s future in space in SpaceX. I wonder if it’s only a matter of time before he starts dangling that to get what he wants in cases like this. I still am generally favorable toward Elon, but I think we’re seeing him transform into a villain

The "cave diver paedophile" incident made it abundantly clear to everyone willing to see that whatever else he may be, Musk is a malicious clown. It was always only a matter of time before that had greater consequences.

Re: Elon’s Out

#167

Post by Spivak »

daenz wrote: post #161
throwaway09223 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What if the court orders Musk to close the deal and he says no? I can't believe people are taking this very silly statement seriously. This is utter nonsense. There are remedies for people who disobey court orders. Having assets makes you more vulnerable to a court's authority because you have something to lose. If a court orders specific performance and he doesn't do it then he's liable and the court will take his…

>the court will take his assets to compensate. How do you seize billions of dollars of stock without affecting share prices?

You don’t care and keep seizing and selling off assets until you hit the target number or you run out of things to seize.

You’re acting like the asset value at all matters to the courts.

Re: Elon’s Out

#168

Post by parineum »

daenz wrote: post #161
throwaway09223 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What if the court orders Musk to close the deal and he says no? I can't believe people are taking this very silly statement seriously. This is utter nonsense. There are remedies for people who disobey court orders. Having assets makes you more vulnerable to a court's authority because you have something to lose. If a court orders specific performance and he doesn't do it then he's liable and the court will take his…

>the court will take his assets to compensate. How do you seize billions of dollars of stock without affecting share prices?

> without affecting share prices

Why should that be a concern?

Re: Elon’s Out

#169

Post by Stupulous »

MrMan wrote: post #121
bmitc wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That can be your opinion, but I think it stands in disagreement with several events and facts of the Republican party. There are oodles of articles and books addressing the growing extremism of the Republican party, so I don't think it's even a controversial opinion. By just saying "oh, they're just another political party with different beliefs" is enabling their extremism. Any rational discussion with a Republican,…

You are pissing in the wind. This place is essentially r/conservative and most of these people are totally fine with how things are progressing. I think the US is completely fucked and no rich people I know care, at all

Yeah, this place is so conservative that you can't even say that Republicans are extremists who are intentionally undermining the country and that everyone who supports them is suffering from a rare mental disorder without people calmly disagreeing. /s

Re: Elon’s Out

#170

Post by hedora »

daenz wrote: post #161
throwaway09223 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What if the court orders Musk to close the deal and he says no? I can't believe people are taking this very silly statement seriously. This is utter nonsense. There are remedies for people who disobey court orders. Having assets makes you more vulnerable to a court's authority because you have something to lose. If a court orders specific performance and he doesn't do it then he's liable and the court will take his…

>the court will take his assets to compensate. How do you seize billions of dollars of stock without affecting share prices?

They could simply keep selling Elon's Tesla stock it until they had the money to cover the court order.

Why should the court or Twitter care if they end up converting 10x more of Elon's stock to cash?

I guess some day traders would get rich (and people that had to sell for the day or so when the stock tanked would take a bath), but that's the biggest problem I can come up with.

Post reply on HN