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

Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

871–880 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#871

Post by ckdarby »

espadrine wrote: post #842
nowherebeen wrote: post #830

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s important to also note that one of Musks strengths is marketing. He makes bold claims that makes headlines. We should be all used to his charade by now. A lot of the stuff he claims that actually works has teams of people supporting him. Those weren’t one man efforts like this.

> one of Musks strengths is marketing I don’t deny that, but it is not what he is doing here. I am not sure why people shy away from the obvious: another of Musk’s strengths is market manipulation. On 4 April, the announcement[0] of his becoming the largest shareholder jumped his Twitter stock[1] from a 73486938×33.03 = $2.4B purchase to a $3.7B asset, a $1.2B gain. He sold 371900 stocks, for a $6M gain. His 14 April…

Now uses the proceeds of profiting to build a competitor

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#872

Post by throwawaycities »

4khilles wrote: post #613
rgbrenner wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s definitely just a stunt… he doesn’t have the money, and said he expects larger shareholders to sign on to the deal… so he can take the company private and do great profit-maximizing ideas like turning their office into a homeless shelter. He’s presented no ideas that would increase twitters profits or market share. What shareholder would sign up for this?

Why would Twitter profits matter to shareholders after they divest?

The real question is why would shareholders that care about profits own Twitter stock? In its entire history there have been 2 years it didn’t lose money and actually recorded a profit.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#873

Post by dm319 »

memish wrote: post #696

Some points from the All in Pod. 1. The Twitter board of directors has become a status thing. It's like a country club. They don't have real skin in the game; they don't own much stock. They're not aligned with the shareholders. It's about status and cultural power. 2. Why should we believe that the company will become more valuable when the stock price is where it was way back in December 2013? Compare to how the S&…

People keep bringing up your point 5 here. Almost every other comment seems to parrot this idea that there is some paragon of free speech that Twitter doesn't achieve.

Setting all the discussion of what free speech should be, aside, I don't see people making the point that Twitter's huge success as a social media platform may actually relate to their moderation policies. Twitter was found to be more resistant to fake news than other social media sites. I don't know whether this relates to the public nature of tweets or their moderation.

Twitter's moderation policy may exactly be the reason the platform has done so well, and rather than clamouring for Twitter to change, I'd suggest that we allow the free market to allow another platform with different a moderation approach to compete.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#874

Post by dm319 »

nickysielicki wrote: post #29

I don’t understand how any board can implement a “poison pill”, not just Twitter but Netflix and others, and not be found working against the interest of shareholders. Can anyone help me understand? You’re categorically changing the profile of the stock. This has a chilling effect on large investors, including but not limited just to Musk, right? Vanguard, for example, has just had its range of further investment lim…

This forum is obsessed with stock. Some things are bigger than the financial 'value' of a company.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#876

Post by ameister14 »

gengelbro wrote: post #648
ameister14 wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The poison pill was mostly developed at a time when the alternative was him selling all the company assets and leveraging the company to load it with as much debt as possible then give out as large a dividend as he could before selling off the stock leaving the company insolvent and everyone out of work. So imagine a company taking $100 million in debt, giving all that out as a dividend then the stock price tanking t…

And this course of events is certain why? Because you've stated so?

Yeah, I didn't say anything about it being certain. I was outlining why it was developed.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#877

Post by dm319 »

RickJWagner wrote: post #445
jgalt212 wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Elon has run several companies immensely more successful than Twitter. Like all things, it depends how you count. The problem I see vis a vis Twitter is it's private company and a public utility at the same time.

I don't think it's run like a public utility. Twitter takes stances that might seem 'centrist' in politically blue areas, but seem biased in red areas. Personally, I think Musk would run it more fairly.

Yes it doesn't fall for the false centre ground.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#878

Post by dm319 »

WalterBright wrote: post #547
yalogin wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, as a counter argument, there is every reason to believe that Musk will make a mockery of twitter and run it into the ground. A social media platform with a lot of responsibility is not for someone as egotistical as Musk. If Zuckerberg is bad, Musk could be catastrophic.

I'll let you in on a secret: every person who runs a company is egotistical. It's not possible to run a company otherwise. You've got to have confidence in yourself and your ideas. Of course, some hide it more assiduously than others. I don't mind Musk boasting. He earned it. It's more refreshing than the fake modesty of others. A CEO friend of mind once called me up all worried because someone called him arrogant. I…

Egotistical is quite different to confident. Narcissistic and egotistical people often have a fragile self-image. Prone to destructive rage[1] with the slightest insult.

[1] like calling someone a paedophile without any evidence.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#879

Post by senthil_rajasek »

WalterBright wrote: post #560
senthil_rajasek wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give some examples? I know one company that had the poison pill provision and did well.

Two companies I'd invested in and lost my shirt on after the pp. It left a lingering sour taste. I'd rather not name them, I'm still sore about it.

That's fair. I am not sure if "poison pill" is the cause of companies going belly up though. Surely, we have contradicting examples.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#880

Post by ck2 »

I guess this is old news but Musk's not even the largest shareholder anymore

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/elon-mu...

When are blogs on your own domain name going to come back full circle?

Ever since AOL people seem to want to give single corporations all their power in walled gardens.

Post reply on HN