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

211–220 of 767 posts

Re: Elon’s Out

#211

Post by sroussey »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #204
dreamcompiler wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Levine has addressed this in past columns. Of course the courts have such authority, but individual people have to enforce the court's decisions, and sometimes those people are reluctant to take on Musk. Musk is a special case because he has done things like threatening to ruin the careers of SEC lawyers who have come after him, and he has the power to make that happen. Is this illegal? Probably. Does Musk get away w…

You're talking about Musk pressuring Cooley to fire a lawyer who previously worked against him at the SEC. But the result was that Cooley told Musk no. Hardly a success story for Musk. There's no shortage of law firms willing to go up against billionaires. Hell, there's no shortage of firms willing to go up against criminal enterprises like drug cartels. The idea that Musk is somehow more threatening than the types t…

Cooley then lost business from Musk firms.

Re: Elon’s Out

#212

Post by tveita »

jollybean wrote: post #144
avalys wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's worse than that. He can't just walk away and _pay_ the fine. He is obligated to close the deal and Twitter can force him to do so. If some external force stops the deal from happening - or if he can show that Twitter egregiously violated the agreement - he can get away with not buying Twitter, but he still has to pay them $1B.

Hey Zeus. How could Musk possibly have done this, which must have been against the advice of his Bankers? "I'm sending men to mars, ergo, I know more about M&A than i-bankers? This is the kind of hubris that takes people down.

It would be perfectly fine terms if he actually wanted to buy Twitter - at a silly price but hey, it's his billions of dollars.

That's presumably what he told people and not "hey I'm just joking around, make sure to write the terms so the deal never actually completes"

Re: Elon’s Out

#213

Post by georgia_peach »

georgia_peach wrote: post #160

This is politics masquerading as legal analysis. Twitter, by its own admission, lied about their user count for years. Elon will either go without penalty, or take a slap on the wrist. Levine spends a lot of time shilling on bots because he knows that's a weak spot for the Elon haterz club. https://nairametrics.com/2022/04/28/twitter-says-it-inflated... edit: Not an Elon fan BTW. Just don't appreciate this Levine's a…

No post body was provided.

Re: Elon’s Out

#214

Post by grecy »

petilon wrote: post #71

This article says Musk agreed to buy Twitter mostly as a joke. I think there's a far better explanation. This wasn't a joke for Musk because after agreeing to buy Twitter he proceeded to sell billions of dollars' worth of TSLA stock, supposedly to finance the purchase. Even for the richest man in the world that's not a joke. I think a better explanation is that Musk offered to buy Twitter as a cover for selling billi…

If that was his plan, what's he doing with the billions he now has in cash?

Re: Elon’s Out

#215

Post by throwaway09223 »

sroussey wrote: post #211
throwaway09223 wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're talking about Musk pressuring Cooley to fire a lawyer who previously worked against him at the SEC. But the result was that Cooley told Musk no. Hardly a success story for Musk. There's no shortage of law firms willing to go up against billionaires. Hell, there's no shortage of firms willing to go up against criminal enterprises like drug cartels. The idea that Musk is somehow more threatening than the types t…

Cooley then lost business from Musk firms.

So what? This is business as usual for law firms. They will lose clients every time they take a case due to conflicts of interest and so on, even if everyone has a happy outcome.

What Musk did was petty and questionable, but it didn't fundamentally change anything for Cooley.

It's not a big deal.

Re: Elon’s Out

#216

Post by gnopgnip »

xxpor wrote: post #61
tyleo wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they could put him in Chancery jail? The law is already undermined if no attempt is even made at upholding it.

But that's not how it works when you simply owe money (usually, modulo things like probation violations and child support, but lets ignore that for now). We don't have debtors prisons). They can seize his money though, garnish his wages (lol in this specific case though), etc.

Contempt of court can lead to jail time in civil cases when you have the ability to but refuse to pay

Re: Elon’s Out

#217

Post by dragontamer »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #162
heartbreak wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

How goes his court ordered Twitter sitter that's supposed to prevent Musk from Tweeting about material effects related to Tesla?

That's what I thought. Musk just ignores the law and gets away with things on a regular basis.

Re: Elon’s Out

#218

Post by throwaway09223 »

gpm wrote: post #202
throwaway09223 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter if they're affected. A judgement is going to be for a dollar amount. A court will rule that Musk must pay twitter X billion dollars. Twitter can then pursue Musk, taking basically anything he owns in terms of business. They could contact the broker holding his shares and restrain them, order them sold, and collect the proceeds. They could seize and sell at auction the real property of any of his bus…

> They could seize and sell at auction the real property of any of his businesses. SpaceX rockets? Office chairs? Servers? Anything. They could not, because he does not own those businesses outright. Doing so would violate the other owners rights. They can seize his shares in SpaceX, but not SpaceX property.

Sure. The particular way the assets are seized depends on a number of different technical details.

But the end result is always the same. You can either voluntarily liquidate and pay your judgements or you can have someone else do it for you.

Re: Elon’s Out

#219

Post by slotrans »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #162
heartbreak wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

But he has agreed to SEC sanctions and then subsequently ignored them...

Re: Elon’s Out

#220

Post by QuarterReptile »

towaway15463 wrote: post #147
bmitc wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your inability to conceive of a useful purpose for such a quantity of money does not justify prohibiting its existence. What inability and where was it demonstrated? Are you referring to a useful purpose if it was taxed or a useful purpose for individuals to have such wealth? If the latter, then I propose that an individual containing such wealth is less useful than it being returned. Those things and countries you…

It’s rather ironic that a discussion of Elon Musk prompted you to make that assertion.

It's so many layers of delightfully nested irony. Give more money to the federal government so they give more big tax credits for Tesla purchases, but Tesla can't exist any more in this fantasy world where nothing outside of the federal government can grow beyond $500 million in scope.
Post reply on HN