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

321–330 of 767 posts

Re: Elon’s Out

#321

Post by croes »

neither_color wrote: post #302
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…

>Tesla's market cap is double of Toyota, VW, Mercedes, BMW, GM, Honda, Ferrari and Volvo all combined! This phrase gets thrown around a lot with dunning-kreuger confidence so I'd like to add context that it's not unusual for a market disruptor to be worth more than the sum of its legacy competitors - you are on a tech website related to startup incubator you should know this already.

Tesla doesn't scale like some internet startups.

Re: Elon’s Out

#322

Post by mjfl »

ALittleLight wrote: post #177
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

I see in Elon a trait I also have, which is to pick up random things, get interested in them for a while, and start to do things, and then realize you're not interested in it at all and drop it. I'm thinking of tunnels, neuralink, AI, taking Tesla private, child saving cave submarine, things like that. I can easily imagine he thought one day that he wanted to get into social media, went full steam ahead, and then rea…

does it really have that many negative externalities? Net negative? electric cars and rockets are pretty cool.

Re: Elon’s Out

#323

Post by KKdU9EXbBhmLznR »

labrador wrote: post #203

I believe he was sincere, but found out quickly that a lot of people had strong feelings about his plans for the platform. It's possible he was in danger of losing people he really needs for his other businesses. I don't blame him for bailing out on a lose/lose situation.

... how is that an excuse? He knew that full well before he ever started thinking about buying it, much less making public statements about it. (Just like he knew about the bots)

Re: Elon’s Out

#324

Post by kolbe »

azinman2 wrote: post #298
kolbe wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russian oligarch yacht seizures are a better argument for them than for you. They're worth tens of billions of dollars, and all the US can get is a nine figure boat.

Don’t forget the homes in London, and the billions in frozen bank accounts. Aka everything not in Russia or China.

So, 10% of their net worth by leveraging what was thought to be illegal and unexpected seizures? Most of which was done by the EU. Sounds like a ringing endorsement of how the US would implement a tax that the wealthy can prepare for and happens within the rule of law.

Re: Elon’s Out

#325

Post by akimball »

moomin wrote: post #209
towaway15463 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facts. She also just paid a fine for the insider trading. Her criminal case was due to conspiracy, obstruction of justice and lying to federal investigators.

“Lying to a federal official” is one of the most BS things in the entire US penal. It’s practically carte blanche to imprison anyone you come across.

It would be more reasonable if federal officials faced similar penalties for lying to the public.

Re: Elon’s Out

#326

Post by KKdU9EXbBhmLznR »

victor106 wrote: post #198

Elon’s going to get away with this. Even though he shouldn’t. The rich play by different rules and the law lets them. If the rest of us did the same we would have to pay ridiculous fines and/or spent time behind bars.

He most likely will have to pay a ridiculous fine (or, more likely, settlement). Of course, the ridiculousness of it will be that it doesn't consider his incredible means, and therefore he'll never miss it and it will have absolutely no impact on his behavior.

Re: Elon’s Out

#327

Post by dodobirdlord »

kcplate wrote: post #230
adventured wrote: post #153

Musk wasn't pretending to buy Twitter, the article is using a sort of simpleton interpretation of Musk's behavior. That's the interpretation someone would take if they dislike Musk and get overly emotional about his behavior. Musk is x y z. Oh my god, did you see the tweet he sent out!?! I just hate Musk, blah blah blah. He's such a terrible human. This one time he called a person a really bad name. - That's the type…

This to me seems the most reasonable explanation and explains most of the behaviors involved on both sides. I don’t buy into “it was just a joke that went too far” theory. Musk doesn’t want a turd. Twitter, essentially made a deal with the devil (from their perspective). Despite being initially opposed to this deal, they now has to sue to try and make it happen, because I suspect if it doesn’t “south of $30” is going…

The possibility of other takeovers doesn’t need to factor into this. If Twitter’s share price is significantly below the price they can force Musk to buy the company at, then the board has an obligation to shareholders to force the sale, and will be sued by the shareholders if they don’t.

Re: Elon’s Out

#328

Post by mempko »

avalys wrote: post #108
BobbyJo wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In very direct, real terms, assets are power. They represent resources to do things. The problem here isn't that wealth is power, it will always be power. The issue is that a single person has been allowed to accumulate too much.

Musk owns about 25% of Tesla, mostly after investing about $50M in Tesla's early funding rounds. His wealth today comes largely because Tesla (under his leadership as CEO) has become a company that investors now believe is incredibly valuable, and they've driven up the stock price. At what point in this process did Musk "accumulate" this ownership of Tesla, and exactly what do you propose should have happened to stop…

Property taxes. We tax physical property, why not legal fictions like stock ownership?

Re: Elon’s Out

#329

Post by tambourine_man »

smaudet wrote: post #306
phillipcarter wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it's just a general sense of disillusionment, but I've come to see that "court orders X" and "X happens" are entirely orthogonal. I will be personally surprised if Musk pays a single cent.

Depends I guess on how 007 you think the world operates (reference to James Bond) - X will happen, but maybe 2-10 years after various counter-suits. Case studies are what has happened e.g. with Microsoft, other large businesses - long legal battles are fought, nothing happens while things are in limbo. When the rubber finally hits the road, things happen fairly quickly, but until then it does look a bit like "nothing…

What has happened to Microsoft? They still have a default browser pre-installed, Office wasn’t spun-off to another company… and I don’t remember the Java stuff anymore but I think nothing happened either, even though it’s a lot less relevant now.

Re: Elon’s Out

#330

Post by KKdU9EXbBhmLznR »

molticrystal wrote: post #281

> One of his hobbies is that he sometimes likes to pretend that he will acquire public companies...He seems to find this fun....When Musk pretended in 2018 that he was going to take Tesla Inc. private, he had to pay the US Securities and Exchange Commission a $20 million fine and stop being the chairman of Tesla’s board. One past example doesn't make a hobby, and I wonder if SEC interference had any impact small or l…

You're right, they should've said that his hobby is just pretending things in general. He enjoys very much being Nelson [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo].

The "SEC interference", as you called it, came long after he had his Nelson moment in that case. (A more accurate name for it might be "SEC slap-on-the-wrist", because it was both completely ineffective and entirely deserved.)

Post reply on HN