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

351–360 of 767 posts

Re: Elon’s Out

#351

Post by scaramanga »

hnbad wrote: post #233
HWR_14 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cash rules everything around me. Serious question: Are you in the US? Any Western European country? There's a tendency for people in corrupt areas to assume the whole world works like that.

Not the parent, not just cash, but capitalism literally means capital is (political) power. Just because you don't bribe police officers with cash that doesn't mean your political system isn't corrupt. In the West we just find it more comfortable to talk about lobbying and public-private partnerships instead of calling it what it is.

That is a great point and I'm not disputing it at all.

We all know monarchy is tyranny, but in that category there is quite a difference between a cult ruler with a bag of shrunken heads who is getting his orders from God vs. a stable, well managed, system in which the institutions basically function, including to some extent for the poor, and yet in which which the ruling class still basically dominate and exploit everything and everyone in order to enrich themselves and maintain their power.

The latter is a social malady, the former is completely chaotic. I think people are concerned that the US is resembling the latter less and less, and resembling the former more and more.

Re: Elon’s Out

#352

Post by mlindner »

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

Can we stop making up conspiracy theories please?

There is zero indication that he would do such a thing as he has no history of doing so. Elon spares no breath praising NASA any time he is asked about NASA.

Re: Elon’s Out

#353

Post by raziel2701 »

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…

Musk decided to pay $54.20/share (because weed joke) for twitter under the guise that he was going to fix the bot problem. Now he wants to back out of the deal because of the bot problem.

He makes no sense.

Re: Elon’s Out

#354

Post by camjohnson26 »

Anon1096 wrote: post #253
camjohnson26 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because car companies are boring, and in an era of cheap money the meme wins. “Sexy” automakers also got insane multiples, look at where Lucid and Rivian were trading. But the capital is diverted to whatever asset people think will keep going up, not the one that will create value in the form of profits. This is also why GameStop, AMC, DogeCoin, Shiba Inu, NFTs, Pokémon cards, etc. were trading so high, the meme is t…

You've basically written a lot of words here to say that Musk is making companies people want to invest in, and somehow that's the Fed's fault.

You’re missing the key point then. People want to invest in NFTs too, and if you don’t see why that’s a problem you’re willfully blind.

Re: Elon’s Out

#355

Post by walnutclosefarm »

jp57 wrote: post #183

Another hypothesis: Triggering a legal battle in the courts is a delaying technique to push out the acquisition until the economy rebounds (and Tesla and Twitter valuations with it), or until after the 2024 election, because Elon realized that he doesn't actually want to let Trump back onto the platform. (Perhaps because he perfers DeSantis)

Or, it's a feint to bring Twitter back to the bargaining table to lower the price outright. I'd lay odds that Musk is betting Twitter needs a buyer enough to prefer a better deal (for Musk) to a cash settlement that left them still looking for a buyer.

Re: Elon’s Out

#356

Post by mlindner »

dang wrote: post #128

Recent and related: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32027341 - July 2022 (1361 comments)

Not just related, this thread should be merged with that one. There is nothing new in this opinion piece article.

Re: Elon’s Out

#357

Post by powerhour »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #275
hotpotamus wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This is a different problem and has to do with privacy. The government can't compel you to disclose everything you're doing without cause, and without due process. Having a court ordered judgement entered against you is cause and is a result of due process. It's an entirely different scenario.

We recently ditched privacy so I think we're getting closer to being able to have a wealth tax.

Re: Elon’s Out

#358

Post by mlindner »

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…

> Musk pretended that TSLA valuation is reasonable. Musk even called out Gates for shorting TSLA stock [2]. If he didn't have a cover then Musk would look like a hypocrite for selling TSLA.

This is outright false and goes directly against his multiple stated instances of saying that the Tesla stock price is overvalued. Don't make things up to suit your biases.

Re: Elon’s Out

#359

Post by nemothekid »

henry_bone wrote: post #305
Pulcinella wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not how any of this works. E.g. the contract he signed already has the price he agreed to buy Twitter for.

Could it be (& I am asking) that he can invalidate the current contract on the grounds that daily active users aren't what twitter said. Then could they draft a new contract, complete with a new price and daily active users estimates? I don't know anything, so I'm asking. If someone out there is a M&A lawyer and can shed light, that would be great.

He could but

1.) Twitter would need to be egregiously wrong. If Musk found that 7% of mDAU were bots, he would likely still be forced to purchase

2.) I feel like the inverse; that Twitter, it’s board, manager and employees were all in on a massive conspiracy to understate the bot problem for almost a decade. The number they presented wasn’t something they just gave musk, it was a number that they have been reporting to the SEC and investors for several years. It would be a massive fraud for Twitter to have committed.

In my opinion the whole thing is a massive distraction so Elon could pull out. The amount of people who only read (but never post) likely dwarfs the number of bots elon suspects there is (if the 90-9-1 rule is anything to go by). The mDAU number is a different, much larger, number than actual tweeters

Re: Elon’s Out

#360

Post by matt3210 »

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…

The laws are enforced with fines, and there for Elon And other rich over lords are above the law.
Post reply on HN