Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

Post by ceejayoz » Fri, Jul 08, 2022, 10:49 PM UTC

somenewaccount1 wrote: post #96

bryananderson wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As Matt Levine explained [0] the “waiving due diligence” doesn’t really mean anything now. What does mean something is that he signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter, giving Twitter the right to compel him to close the deal, and there’s no “too many bots” exception, nor a “you were wrong (or even lied) about something you said” exception. He has to prove that it’s a “material adverse effect” which I understand is…

idk. the fact that the price had already sunk nearly 40% from his price over this period could clearly indicate that his assumption isn't without merit.

Post by spfzero » Fri, Jul 08, 2022, 10:49 PM UTC

pryce wrote: post #155

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

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.

Post by oneoff786 » Fri, Jul 08, 2022, 10:50 PM UTC

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…

Post by ceejayoz » Fri, Jul 08, 2022, 10:50 PM UTC

r3trohack3r wrote: post #303

I have very little context here. It seems the general sentiment in the comments is that this attempt to get out of the merger agreement will fail and that Musk will be forced to follow through with the purchase of Twitter. At the current rate Twitter is trading at, Musk will be paying roughly 50% over market value to acquire the company. So a question: if you believe Musk will still purchase Twitter at an inflated pr…

Post by metadat » Fri, Jul 08, 2022, 10:52 PM UTC

hwers wrote: post #338

strangeloops85 wrote: post #174

This is going to Delaware Chancery court, and if his ridiculous claims hold it does turn upside down long-held general principles of mergers and acquisitions that would affect.. everyone. I don't think the court will side with him on this. In the past, they have forced mergers to go through..

So embarrassing if he ends up being forced to own it and everyone knows he tried to back out.